electrolysis

[butcher]

your expieriments in electrolisis may come in handy, to break down the metals to powder, then the chemicals could be minimized. how about that salt cell using a membrane cell?

 

[EVO-AU]

Traveler11:

Hate to burst your bubble old man, but Mother Earth News back in the eighties - built a self contained hydrogen powered vehicle which is still running around Henderson County,NC. It pops up every now and then. Last summer ( '08 ) it was tooting along in downtown Hendersonville, NC. Also, there are two other homemade vehicles using hydrogen fuel in this immediate area.

I know nothing of the present ownership of these vehicles, but they do exist. Phill

Butcher: Just saw your post about living. I remember working in the mines as a child ( 8 ) and what we took for granted then as necessities would sure toast a lot of civilized brains today. My pipes froze last week and of course - blew. I just took my sweet time repairing and thanked the Man upstairs that I had piped water and not have to chop a hole in the spring and drag buckets of water around. But, you know, despite the fact that everybody carried a gun, there were no drug problems. Ah, the days when, whatever..................Phill

 

[Traveller11]

No bubble has been burst; least of all mine. Hydrogen powered vehicles are not uncommon. In fact, virtually the same plumbing used on a car to power it on natural gas will work well for hydrogen with a few changes.

The question is the economics of producing hydrogen as a fuel.

Would you be so kind as to elaborate on what is meant by a "self-contained hydrogen powered vehicle"? Are you saying that the engine of this vehicle is able to produce enough power to dissociate water into hydrogen and oxygen AND still have enough power available at the flywheel to move the vehicle down the road?

 

[Harold_V]

Are you saying that the engine of this vehicle is able to produce enough power to dissociate water into hydrogen and oxygen AND still have enough power available at the flywheel to move the vehicle down the road?

Not for long, it won't. There is no free lunch, and that describes one. Ain't gonna happen.

Harold

 

[EVO-AU]

Harold: What ain't gonna happen ? I do not follow your drift. Elucidate, please !

Traveller: All I can tell you is what I have seen on the road and in Mother's Eco-Village. ( Which no longer exists ) How they do their closed-circuit operation is beyond me. If I had the room and the TIME to indulge in this type of experimentation, I would gladly go for it. Sorry about the lack of information on this end; but there should be a great deal of information on the net somewhere.

Phill

 

[jsargent]

Why is it that every time someone builds a hydrogen fueled car some people immediately assume it's some sort of free-energy hoax and they dutifully trot out the second law of thermodynamics and so forth? This is nonsense. Free energy or perpetual motion is NOT what hydrogen fuel advocates are promoting at all. Same goes for all-electric vehicles. The fact is these vehicles are much more efficent than the common internal combustion engines because the source electric power for these systems is or can be supplied by the Power Grid (coal, natural gas, nuclear, hydroelectric, etc). The source electricity can also be supplied by photovoltaics of course which greatly increases the "efficiency". The MPG equivalent for an electric vehicle is commonly in excess of 100MPG.

Now, having said this, I must also add that the day will come when power generation systems will be produced that tap into the quantum fluctuations of the Zero Point Energy Field, extracting usable energy from Space itself. This may not happen for decades but chances are good that it WILL happen. This too is NOT perpetual motion in any way, any more than wind power is perpetual, though the net effect is the same. As Dr. Richard Feynman was fond of saying "There's enough energy in the space occupied by an empty glass to boil off all the oceans on Earth".

Now back to work boys and make us some gold.

 

[Traveller11]

I'm afraid that you seem to be doing a good deal of jumping around here. EVO was discussing a "self-contained hydrogen powered" vehicle. By this I would assume he was referring to the great number of systems currently being promoted on the Internet. They all make the nonsensical claim that the alternator of the car engine is able to dissociate water into H2 and O2 and thereby give you greater fuel economy.

As Harold pointed out, there are no free lunches; at least not in this universe anyways.

I stated in an earlier post that the energy required to dissociate a given amount of H2O into O2 and H2 is roughly 1.1 times as much as you can hope to recover when combusting the same amount of H2 and O2. In other words, in a "self contained hydrogen powered vehicle", this would lower your fuel economy rather than raise it.

If you compare electric cars to hydrogen fueled cars (be they internal combustion, external combustion or fuel cells) there really is no contest. If we assume that all hydrogen production requires electricity, hydrogen simply adds an expensive extra step to the objective, which is propelling a vehicle up and down the road.

Why go to the trouble of dissociating H2O into H2 and O2, at an obvious loss, when it would be far simpler to send the electricity to the consumer and let him recharge the batteries of an electric car?

I have already stated that the distribution system for refuelling electric cars exists; it is the electric grid tied into every home.

Unfortunately, no distribution system for hydrogen exists. Nor does the manufacturing infrastructure for making hydrogen. To create all of this would, in my estimation, cost billions if not trillions.

The future of the car lies in a better storage battery.

 

[EVO-AU]

Gentlemen: Hydrogen is a possible way to go - for the polliticians - trillions ? Exponentially speaking, of course !!! And I was referring to the homemade vehicles of which I spoke. I haven't ventured on the net in this direction - knowing all the crap that will come up. Batteries have come a long way - for sure - but we still have a long way to go.

Have either of you ever read the arguments and discussions that arose between Brown, Westinghouse and Tesla ? Century + later and the theories still abound as to what is and what is not practical. Man just is not satisified. Just has to go out and stir up the Hecates kettle all over again. Will we ever learn ?

Phill

 

[jsargent]

I'm afraid that you seem to be doing a good deal of jumping around here. EVO was discussing a "self-contained hydrogen powered" vehicle. By this I would assume he was referring to the great number of systems currently being promoted on the Internet. They all make the nonsensical claim that the alternator of the car engine is able to dissociate water into H2 and O2 and thereby give you greater fuel economy. It's been my experience that it's best to dismiss crazy ideas out of hand when dealing with complex systems. The IC engine and the electric power generating system tied to it wastes a great deal of energy. IF some of this otherwise wasted energy can be dedicated to dissassociation of water then there is no reason why fuel efficiency could not be improved. Even if all you did was route the exhaust thru a heat exchanger to drive a small turbine, one could capture wasted energy that way with no drain on the engine.
As Harold pointed out, there are no free lunches; at least not in this universe anyways. BS! The universe is chock full of free lunches. You just have to know where to look. Aside from the cost and energy used to create the initial machinery and maintain it, there are abundant free lunches when it comes to electrical energy production. Hydrothermal, wind, hydroelectric, photovoltaics, tidal, etc. Now I realize Howard was referring to "no free lunches" in terms of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and he is right, in terms of conventional 19'th century physics. (Which is the level of science currently being used to generate power in the world today)

I stated in an earlier post that the energy required to dissociate a given amount of H2O into O2 and H2 is roughly 1.1 times as much as you can hope to recover when combusting the same amount of H2 and O2. In other words, in a "self contained hydrogen powered vehicle", this would lower your fuel economy rather than raise it. Assuming it required dedicated power from the engine yes
If you compare electric cars to hydrogen fueled cars (be they internal combustion, external combustion or fuel cells) there really is no contest. If we assume that all hydrogen production requires electricity, hydrogen simply adds an expensive extra step to the objective, which is propelling a vehicle up and down the road. Yep. Hydrogen production and transport is very inefficent
Why go to the trouble of dissociating H2O into H2 and O2, at an obvious loss, when it would be far simpler to send the electricity to the consumer and let him recharge the batteries of an electric car? Yep

I have already stated that the distribution system for refuelling electric cars exists; it is the electric grid tied into every home.

Unfortunately, no distribution system for hydrogen exists. Nor does the manufacturing infrastructure for making hydrogen. To create all of this would, in my estimation, cost billions if not trillions.

The future of the car lies in a better storage battery. Most likely

 

[jsargent]

Have either of you ever read the arguments and discussions that arose between Brown, Westinghouse and Tesla ?
Phill

I'm somewhat familiar with Westinghouse and Tesla. George Westinghouse was a close friend of my great grandfather. In fact my great grandfather worked for Westinghouse and while working for him, invented the Westinghouse Air Brake used on all trains today.

Tesla and his work have always been of interest to me. There's a great biography by Margaret Cheney called "Tesla: Man Out of Time" if you're interested

 

[qst42know]

This has been discussed at great length. HHO, Brown's gas, etc. All are dependent on electricity from more traditional sources, a charged battery, a running engine. Because no conversion of energy (electricity to gas) is perfect there are always losses however small (resistance heat).

The idea you can create energy from nothing is Bong hit science, the more bong hits, the more sense it makes. The laws of physics will not allow it but a couple more bong hits and you may even invest in one of the publicly traded companies that promote this so called science.

It can be a convenient source of hydrogen for a PGM torch but what you get out is always less than what you put in in terms of energy.

 

[Harold_V]

This has been discussed at great length. HHO, Brown's gas, etc. All are dependent on electricity from more traditional sources, a charged battery, a running engine. Because no conversion of energy (electricity to gas) is perfect there are always losses however small (resistance heat).

The idea you can create energy from nothing is Bong hit science, the more bong hits, the more sense it makes. The laws of physics will not allow it but a couple more bong hits and you may even invest in one of the publicly traded companies that promote this so called science.

It can be a convenient source of hydrogen for a PGM torch but what you get out is always less than what you put in in terms of energy.

If the comments, above, do not make sense, you really should avoid any contact with the "wizardry" of hydrogen in a closed system. Your lack of understanding will be the source of lost wealth and time.

There is no such thing, and there will never be such a thing. There will always be losses to insure that's true.

I am not open to discussion in this matter unless you can provide evidence that losses don't exist.

Harold

 

[Harold_V]

As Harold pointed out, there are no free lunches; at least not in this universe anyways.

BS! The universe is chock full of free lunches. You just have to know where to look.

Talk is cheap! Show me, and prove to me it's "free energy". It may be collected free of charge, but it was not created free. There is a loss any time energy is transferred from one form to another.

Hydro-power isn't free-----the difference is we don't pay for lifting the water that provides the energy. If we did, it would be a losing proposition.

Offer an example that's free.

You can't do it!

Harold

 

[jsargent]

As Harold pointed out, there are no free lunches; at least not in this universe anyways.

BS! The universe is chock full of free lunches. You just have to know where to look.

Talk is cheap! Show me, and prove to me it's "free energy". It may be collected free of charge, but it was not created free. There is a loss any time energy is transferred from one form to another.

Hydro-power isn't free-----the difference is we don't pay for lifting the water that provides the energy. If we did, it would be a losing proposition.

Offer an example that's free.

You can't do it!

Harold

I already gave you five examples of free energy. (Wind, geothermal, photovoltaics, hydroelectric, tidal) These are "free" in the sense that no human activity is required to impart the initial energy into the system. Solar radiation, natural radioactive decay and lunar tidal forces are the sources of the initial energies into which we simply put our taps in the form of windmills, hydroelectric dams and so forth. I AM NOT SAYING THE ENERGY IS FREE IN THE SENSE OF PERPETUAL MOTION. Nothing vilotates the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and yet, these sources are free in the sense they cost us nothing other than the machinery.

My second point, and perhaps this is what you are questioning, is that there exist sources or resevoirs of energy in the universe which are virtually limitless yet we have not built the machinery yet to exploit these sources. The Zero Point Energy Field is one such source. Someday I predict we will understand how to tap this resevoir of energy, just like early 20'th Century scientists who tapped the power of radioactive decay with the machine we call the Nuclear Reactor. Maybe I'm wrong, but I am an inventor and I'll happily reinvent the wheel if it makes the wheel more efficient or cheaper or whatever. It's a genetic thing. I can't help it.

 

[Harold_V]

I understand your position, and I applaud your efforts. We would be nowhere without folks with a curious and creative mind.

As long as you understand that the forces you mentioned are not without cost (albeit not to us), I am in full support of your endeavors. What I do not support is the notion that you can fill a can with water, splitting the water electrically to be used as fuel to power a vehicle, then capturing the water that is formed upon the combustion of hydrogen and oxygen, creating a closed loop system that is self powered. That, indeed, is perpetual motion, and is nothing short of a waste of time for everyone involved.

Best of luck to you.

Harold

 

[butcher]

Plant grass ride a horse, use by product on garden. of coarse even that is not all that energy efficent, but there is no free lunch, never has been never will be.

 

[EVO-AU]

Jeff: Now I know where you inherited your gift of intelligence.

Butcher: Alice's Restaurant, maybe ? ( I just found yur post about sheetrock for cupels. Cute; Gotta try that ! )

Harold: You have got the handle, ole buddy !

 

[jsargent]

Sheetrock for cupels? Now THAT'S brilliant. Yet one more item I can buy at Lowe's for a purpose it was never intended

Here's the Lowe's List so far in no particular order:

HCL.... Muriatic Acid
Oxalic Acid... Wood deck bleach
Peroxy Monopersulfate... Non-Chlorine Pool Oxidizer (Oxone Brand)
Sodium Bromide... Spa Shock Treatment
20% Acetic Acid
Citric Acid
Calcium Hypochlorite
Sodium Chlorate... used as a weed killer or some such thing
Sodium Chloride 50lb bags... water softner salt
Distilled water
Ferrous sulfate
Sodium Hydroxide (drain opener)
Sodium Bisulfite (rust remover)

Probably a few things escape me at the moment but it's amazing you can get all these items so easily nowadays if ya dig around in Lawn and Garden.

 

[EVO-AU]

Jeff:

That is an astounding list. Gosh darn it, I have so many things to try now, I'll never get ahead. But oh what fun. An old professor of mine once said that I had too many projects started and too many lists of unavailable materials. Sad, but true !!!!! "Course that was about five decades ago. Boy, if he was only here today to see the raw and artificial materials at our disposal. ( Except for big brother and homeland security )

Lowes' drain cleaner doesn't turn me on. Have you ever heard of Thrift. Really nice with which to work.

Two books that I like are :

The Life and Times of Nikola Tesla by Marc J. Seifer and

Tesla Said by John T. Ratclaff However, I'll look up your title.

Have a nice weekend. Phill

 

[jsargent]

I understand your position, and I applaud your efforts. We would be nowhere without folks with a curious and creative mind.

As long as you understand that the forces you mentioned are not without cost (albeit not to us), I am in full support of your endeavors. What I do not support is the notion that you can fill a can with water, splitting the water electrically to be used as fuel to power a vehicle, then capturing the water that is formed upon the combustion of hydrogen and oxygen, creating a closed loop system that is self powered. That, indeed, is perpetual motion, and is nothing short of a waste of time for everyone involved.

Best of luck to you.

Harold

Thanks Harold and best luck to you as well and thanks too for sharing your experince gained during your years of refining. This forum and the people who contribute to it are an invaluable resource to all of us. I learn something new every day here it seems.